"Nelson A. de Oliveira" <nao...@debian.org> writes:
> On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 2:54 PM, Christian PERRIER <bubu...@debian.org> wrote:
>
>> Indeed, 3 times the memory size seems too big, particularly with large
>> amounts of RAM ("large" varies over time!).
>
> I was reading the recipes in partman-auto and while it seems that it's
> not possible with the infrastructure that we have now, something like
> an inverse exponential function would fit, I think.
> For example, with a small amount of RAM a swap space of 300% the RAM
> size would be created.
> Then the higher the RAM size available, the smaller the swap space created.
> On a system with 8GB, instead creating a swap space of 24GB (300%), we
> could have 4GB only (50%, or even less).
>
> Just a suggestion (that needs to be thought better).
Suspend to disk can easily require 100% swap space (assuming you run
some big application in your big memory). The main problem is that it
isn't easy to modify the automatic swap allocation. Nowadays I'd
recommend going with LVM and leaving some space unused for future
allocation (which again require manual partitioning).
Regarding the LVM recipes in general, they suck up all available space,
negating a strong point of LVM: flexible future allocation. (In
principle one could shrink some filesystems and reallocate space, but
that's often impractical even when possible.) Just some thoughts.
--
Regards,
Feri.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87ocbs1piu....@tac.ki.iif.hu
